There’s nothing that can erode the public’s trust in the system more than when the system fails to uphold its own laws or hold itself accountable.
Dr. Skip Gallager leads a watchdog group that analyzes public records to monitor misbehavior within the NOPD. Recently, he’s brought to attention two instances where officers drove about 2x over the blood-alcohol limit with kids in the vehicle. Driving drunk, they crashed their vehicles. In one instance, they flipped the car with three kids under 12 in the car.
When you hear something like this, I’d imagine you think something along the lines of. How deplorable. They’re supposed to protect the community, not endanger it. I hope they throw the book at them. Sadly, that’s not the case.
Gallagher joined the show to explain that the two officers involved in these crashes, Johnathan McCarvy and Gerald Lee, were never prosecuted. And not only did they avoid prosecution, but they’re still employed by the NOPD. And not only are they still employed, but they have hardly received disciplinary action.
McCarvy received a 45-day suspension. Lee had a 120-day suspension reduced to 2 days before being placed on desk duty. Then, if you try to uncover the reasons behind such wimpy outcomes, you only run into more questions.
First off, it’s important to note that law enforcement confirmed they were indeed intoxicated.
Gallagher explains, “Both officers refused tests at the scene. Gerald Lee, when found, was unconscious. When brought around, he initially refused, but finally took one, and that’s when he got 0.19, and the limit is 0.08, just over 2x the limit…The other refused one on the scene, but later agreed to a blood alcohol test and scored 0.156, just under 2x the limit.”
Gallager tells me, “At least one went through a diversion program, maybe both... One, the POV report actually says 'no prosecute,' so the City of New Orleans just refused the charges…It would be interesting to see court records to see if anything is there as to why charges were refused.”
To add even more shade to an already shady situation, Gallagher says the POV reports appear inconsistent, saying, “The POV reports that one of the officers was punished by the NOPD; they received a suspension. But in the other case, the POV report is lacking and dismisses the stuff the officers noted on the scene. When the officers responded to the scene… the children didn't appear to be in their seat belts. The officer who responded noted that the passenger, driver, and kids weren’t in their seatbelts. Later on, the POV report says they couldn't confirm this.”
It really is disturbing when you see very haphazard or weak reports for actions that, if prosecuted, would be felonies.
Gallager explains that as much as he’s trying, those in charge of handling this process haven’t commented on why these two are still employed, and why there’s been such an effort to keep records sealed. He also notes that this isn’t the first time something like this has happened.
“We have others like Cleveland Johnson, who're still on the force,” says Gallagher. “He had a 60-minute standoff with NOPD officers in the French Quarter…He’s surrounded by ½ dozen officers refusing to be arrested…This one was about three years ago, a still on the force… This took me two years to get my hands on the records.”
That’s where Gallagher is at right now: In check by the judicial system that’s refusing to provide the information.
“I’m still trying to get some of these records,” says Gallagher. “I’m in court yet again, hopefully, in June. I was supposed to be in court on Thursday, but that was pushed, and I don’t have a specific date. We cannot pin the city down, and they’re continuing to resist providing records.
Why is it so hard? These records are supposed to be easy to obtain with a simple public record request.
Gallagher explains the delays to the best of his ability, saying, “There’s a real push on the city’s end to deny these records…I just recently asked for that record for 2024, and they refused to provide it…on the ground that there’s information in the new record that I shouldn't have access to.”
This answer is simply unacceptable. The correct answer is simple: redact it.
You don’t get to disqualify public information just for one sentence that needs to be taken out. You redact that sentence. These judges know that, and I, personally, want to know the names of the judges who are providing these excuses and kicking these cases around.
Again, this is the kind of stuff that causes people to lose confidence in the system. Because what are you protecting in the end, really? We need an explanation.
And in addition to this, I would love for someone to articulate a position on how this approach makes any sense. Because we all know, if you or I did the same thing as those two officers, we’d be doing the perp walk straight to jail.
Related
